A Different Conversation About Systemic Racism
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 05. 2024
- The Michael Shermer Show # 434
Brown University professor and author of "Metaracism" Tricia Rose says Coleman Hughes is wrong, systemic racism is very much real in 2024, and we can't claim to be colorblind if we are to adequately address it.
Shermer and Rose discuss: the policies, practices, laws, and beliefs that are racist in 2024 and what can be done about them • racism, structural racism, systemic racism, metaracism • Rose’s working-class background growing up in 1960s Harlem • being “caught up in the system” • Trayvon Martin, Kelley Williams-Bolar, Michael Brown, and George Floyd • Rose’s response to Black conservative authors Shelby Steele and Thomas Sowell • why she believes Coleman Hughes is wrong about colorblindness • Obama's legacy • reparations.
SUPPORT THE PODCAST
If you enjoy the podcast, please show your support by making a $5 or $10 monthly donation.
www.skeptic.com/donate/
#michaelshermer
#skeptic
Listen to The Michael Shermer Show or subscribe directly on CZcams, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and Google Podcasts.
www.skeptic.com/michael-sherm... - Věda a technologie
“Racially equal”
This entire conversation is just broken. This notion of “equality” amongst large groups is a pipe dream. How academics cannot understand this is truly beyond me
I think Shermer is like me in that he’s beyond bored of the race discussion
I think Michael pulled his punches in this interview.
Not sure why.
She's wrong again, CRT is different than the idealism of social change in the 70's. The difference is in taking a group conflict perspective on race issues. That's what the word 'critical' means! [to be more precise, critical refers to critique of power structures, in this context the "power structures" are interpreted as racist - assuming oppressed and oppressor groups.] I can't believe she doesn't know that.
The discussion of systemic racism is clearly circular reasoning. It's like a black box, if disparity results then what goes on in the box is "systemic racism". No, to make that claim you must be able to link specific racist acts to the outcomes. Otherwise you're just assuming your premise. You can't just look at the result and assume racism. In her metaphor she used a coke factory. The problem with that is a factory is contained, so the outcome can be attributed to the factory. That isn't the case with complex social systems, you have to clearly define the mechanisms in the social system and show how they produce the result, if not attributions of systemic racism are vacuous and circular.
Strawman argument. Have you actually read Crenshaw and Bell’s work? You shown no evidence that you have.
@@KhonsurasBalancedWaytoWellness Perhaps you can save a lot of time by clearly defining what is the strawman argument, and why it is an exaggerated weak version. To just call something strawman is not sufficient, you must explain how and why.
Simply put your definition and understanding of CRT
@@silvertube52 Simply put your ill- defined understanding of CRT.
@@KhonsurasBalancedWaytoWellness Sorry, that's just repeating an accusation. Define where the strawman exists.
This comment section is reassuring
I disagree profoundly with some of the guest's arguments, but I am glad to hear them on the forum. It is vague to recommend structural change without being able to specify individuals doing it, and with scattershot comments meant to make the situation cloudier. It would be worthwhile to listen to this conversation again and to analyze the argumentative game plays, while acknowledging where the author's arguments hold up.
Enjoyed the dialogue! She’s very knowledgeable and able to articulate these complexities better than most.
Slavery is not an exclusively European sin - ever heard of the Ottoman Empire?
China, the middle east, America...
When did she say that it was?
Africa
This woman seems very untrustworthy,in trying to fight very non-marginal problems,she is willfully blind to creating more than the ones she is addressing
Thank you for Tricia Rose for coming on and having the discussion. Michael mentioned recently how he finds it difficult to get people from your perspective on and he's left with only the heteredox, anti-Identitiy Politics (or whatever the label should be) proponents.
Yeah! He should ask Asante and Karenga to come on.
This was a great conversation. Both sides did well discussing not just views and opinions, but efforts to change things instead of just complaining about problems or pretending problems do not exist.
Some cultures do poorly because they make poor choices. It's not the fault of "the system".
because their populations have bad genes
It's evolution not culture
Maybe it’s genetic
@@bryanutility9609 - I posted the same thing but it got deleted, wonder if your comment will remain xD
@@WorthlessWinner mine has no context it’s implied
Can't choice-making be subsumed into "the system"?
the "systemic racism" she always talks about is ghost hunting
Yes, it's part paranoid thinking and part confirmation bias. If your perspective is that systemic racism is pervasive, you will see it in everything.
I do believe there are systemic racism issues in the economic system but it’s rather small. Ladies like this act like it’s rampant systemic racism across all systems and that’s just nonsense
Really? The most liked comment on this video (as of now) is saying that systemic racism does not exist at all - or at least that trying to identify/fix it is a foolish ghost hunt?
That's a pretty extreme position. Dr. Shermer would almost certainly not endorse this idea.
It's funny that she's at the same institution as Glenn Loury and yet never appeared on the Glenn show.
I bet they talk
Racist saying racist stuff. How new. The question is : why did you call her on the show?
The amount of ignorance is just mind blowing
Could you elaborate?
@@jraider2 they are too ignorant to know what’s going on I think they are saying.
But guys we can’t equalize small families so we need to equalize very large groups of people - it can be done! 😂
A little more pushback from Michael was sorely needed. Unless the objective was to point out the absurdity of many of her arguments by not commenting.
I wish people actually LISTENED to this whole interview.
IMO Dr. Rose is not some crazy woke ideologue. A lot of what she's saying is pretty moderate and/or reasonable. Using systems theory (I love these MIT-type approaches) in this context is super interesting!
I did listen to the whole thing and I don't think she's a woke ideologue. But I'm also not exactly impressed by her use of systems theory. Isn't she just using it to say that we have to use lower level events (like instances of racism) to suggest that there is systemic racism at a higher level of analysis? Doesn't seem that profound, and frankly not that much more complex than what you would find in a CRT textbook from the 80s. Also, her main solution seems to be that we become more aware of the higher level analysis - she said there has to be a paradigm shift. Again, not that profound and not so different from DEI seminars that are mainly focused on making white people aware of their racism. All of this said, I haven't read her book so maybe in it she has more sophisticated arguments than this.
I might read it, too
Well, men and women are different, and people of different genetic origins are different. Pretending they are all equal and blaming whoever for different outcomes is silly. Individuals that achieved great success had their own unique traits that made it possible.
I just listened to the interview and don't think Tricia Rose would disagree there are differences not caused by society (and others which caused by society)
Fine. Agreed. Now what?
I appreciate Tricia Rose's perspective that Whites are not inherently racist, that alone was refreshing. I also appreciate her emphasis that racism needs to be understood and addressed in a systemic way and that we need to have conversations in order to forge real understanding and change. At the same time I tend to agree with Coleman Hughes that improving the wellbeing of Blacks for the most part can best be tackled by addressing socio economic disparities regardless of race. Also Glenn Lowery and other experts have pointed out that Whites and Blacks below the poverty line share very similar socio-economic characteristics and it is the Whites who are above the median income that skew the socio-economic statistics to make it seem like Whites are better off than Blacks overall. To be fair, there often are more headwinds against Blacks all else being equal like the lingering effects of lower family wealth etc. I bet Dr. Rose's book is encyclopedic and enlightening in detailing the barriers Blacks face. Still, when looking at solutions, to me the most powerful investment would be to level up the educational school systems staring with the zipcodes that have the highest drop out rates, highest poverty rates, and highest crime rates. Whether you want to call the problem racism or classism or whatever ism, the fact that we don't give kids an equal (and maybe I mean equitable) start slays me. I don't even have kids and I can't wrap my brain around the fact that this nation does not commit to providing EVERY child an excellent educational foundadation, and not just academically but with a foundation of nutritional, emotional, and physical well being.
A 2011 study found that blacks constituted 12.4% of pedestrians stopped by police, and 12.8% of drivers stopped by police. Since blacks make up just under 13% of the population, police do not target blacks disproportionately for street or traffic stops, even though blacks and the media constantly claim otherwise. However, a larger percentage of black drivers than white or Hispanic drivers were stopped by black police officers. Among drivers stopped in traffic stops, there was no statistical difference in the percentage of whites and blacks who were ticketed. However, a greater percentage of white drivers were ticketed when stopped by black officers (64%) than white officers (49%). For black and Hispanic drivers stopped by police, the percentage issued a ticket did not vary by the race or ethnicity of the officer. [Lynn Langton and Matthew Durose. Police Behavior during Traffic and Street Stops, 2011. NCJ 242937, September 2013.]
Thanks for this interview Michael. After an hour & a half of listening, I was impressed with how comprehensively your guest undermined her own arguments as she continued talking. Basically, just another apologist for the lowered standards of DEI, BLM& defunding the police. I suppose I should read her book.
A good conversation Michael. Unfortunately there appears to be a lot of resistance to reasonable ideas, historical fact and other alarmist reactionary statements in the comments section. Many should read the book before saying anything.
Fucking endless grievance.
there seems to be pretty good data to justify why some neighborhoods are heavily policed....
No it has to be due to racism 😂
She falles for the marxist trap,because we dont live in a utopia(in this instance true colorblindess),we need to restructure everything to make it perfect,only to end up with more problems and lose the constant progress we experience(matt riddley/pinker/or in this instance what coleman hugh says up to 2012 race relations were improving)
too much rambling...
13 do 50. Is the only statistic you need to know.
Everyone sees themselves as "at zero". All humans compare themselves to others, with themselves as reference, as the neutral starting point. You're taking a universal phenomenon and pathologizing it for one "group". Whites are not "taught" they the neutral point, it's inherent in the thinking of all humans. The "teaching" is what you're doing, acting as an ideological activists, preaching that a "group" is either privileged or oppressed. Making the assumption that "groups" (race) must be either privileged or oppressed. Imposing a group conflict perspective, at the core of your thinking on race, begs the question, because the lens used assumes oppression. You see racism in all things because that's the conceptual framework you've imposed. That is the meta-racism.
Lucid. No rambling. Nicely done.
Maybe she did well because her name is Tricia Rose, she dresses well, is well presented and speaks well.
would be nice to have the lines in the video of each of the different subjects or in the description the time and subjects. Perhaps one of the listeners will post it below.
Almost all the disparities that Tricia explains as being due to race can equally be explained by class. Many of those in a position of power or influence (such as teachers or police) are fearful of accusations of professional misconduct and are obviously aware of those whose accusations will or will not carry weight. People at the bottom of society lack influence and so are at risk of mistreatment.
In the UK, long before migration of non white immigrants, parents with aspirations for their children (nearly all parents) were keen that their children’s circle of friends were at least of similar status and preferably higher, in an era where your accent was the most obvious sign of social status. Skin colour as a mark of social status is a much more obvious marker and being unalterable makes progress up the social ladder much more difficult. That black skin colour is still a marker of low social status is obviously seen as unfair in the eyes of most people but it is still a fairly reasonable marker so far as family wealth, education and cultural norms are concerned. One of the problems with Critical Race Theory is that its most extreme proponents are more interested in destroying the system than in ending racial inequality.
The usual evidence of disparities is evidence of discrimination hypothesis treated as fact ... cool.
Her hands and animated way of communication is very distracting.
She is very erratic and nervous
@@brianmeen2158 That's erraticism 😜
Another great show and cool author. Love the approach and topic. I would love to hear Linda Villarosa (Book - Under The Skin) on this topic too!
As an anglo with undergrad degrees in Black Studies, Psycholgy, and Music with grad studies in Intercultural Relations, I found this show to be right along the lines of what I think of daily and learned through my studies and research. A great thanks to Dr. Shermer and Dr. Rose.
Lol thought you were joking
I get the impression she doesn’t think Michael read her book twice 😆
$ GRIEVANCE INDUSTRIAL COMPEX $
Somehow this lady actually looks like her opinions.😂😂😂
Every ïsm" and änti-ism"is just for the benefit of the self and not for entire humanity. If you are convinced otherwise, you are just kidding yourselves.
I don’t care about “entire humanity”. I care about me, my family, my nation, & my heritage. I’d prefer others live apart.
23:40 to 26:12 - That doesn't make any sense. Aiming to solve specific and identifiable problems doesn't mean that one thinks the system is fundamentally fair. If we're to really help people of color we need to solve specific and measurable problems like insufficient equality of quality education.
1:11:06 to 1:11:36 - It's profoundly historically ignorant to say that the modern West is what produced the category of race. The idea of race existed in ancient times also.
1:16:28 to 1:19:57 - She doesn't seem to be correctly understanding what Coleman Hughes position actually is. It's a shame there wasn't more pushback here.
Her gyrating is very distracting!
I don't normally feel like commenting on these things, but here's a question on my mind.
23 and me tells me I'm a guy with 98% Northwestern European DNA. But I'm a member of Haplogroup I-Z138 A on my paternal side, from Eastern Africa. My mother's side are Haplogroup H1 L, from a bit further south in Eastern Africa.
So I'm African? Oh... no I'm not because these people lived around 300,000 years ago. So African Americans are still African, because their ancestors were moved to the Americas only a few 100s of years ago and their skin is still black? Its clearly odd to call me African, but is it also a bit racist to deny me my ancestry and not call me African.
The whole concept and definition of race seems really hard to pin down, flawed, and contradictory. It does not seem like a sensible framing to try and fix contemporary societal problems. Grow up. Get rid of it and help the people having a tough time today irrespective of their race. Push on Coleman Hughes.
Huh?
If you're anti-woke, think about this comment around 22:30
'Color blindness can be an approach to denying racism, but it can also be a productive future possibility'
If Coleman Hughes had said that, would you agree? Sounds pretty reasonable.
If you took something Coleman said (that you find unreasonable) and put it in Tricia Rose's mouth, you'd suddenly find it reasonable? I can't say I'm surprised to see this level of critical thinking coming from woke ideologues. If Coleman did actually say it, he would have meant it in the sense: "color blindness can be an approach to denying racism (the opportunity to occur)".
@@tinymutantsquid I try that thought experiment all the time. It's a good trick to try and prevent politics from corrupting your critical thinking ability.
@@tinymutantsquid The point is to honestly listen with an open mind to what people are saying - especially those you disagree with.
And most of what I'm hearing from Dr. Rose today sounds pretty moderate & reasonable. I don't agree with 100% but it's not crazy ideological nonsense. It's thoughtful stuff - like the novel application of systems theory.
I want to be around other people like myself, it’s only natural.
If immigrants tend towards their own group why shouldn't you
@@warbler1984 they shouldn’t be here
Next time find down kid
Some comments herein are rotten. If you give a rude, dismissive sentence about Tricia Rose's comments, you are proving her right, or at least making her sound smarter than you. If you disagree, say why. If not, you're rubber-stamping DEI by making opposition to it sound moronic.
She's culturally appropriating Italian hand gesturing